Dawson v. Yucus
97 Ill. App.2d 101, 239 N.E.2d 305 (1968)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
A devise to two or more named individuals that specifies the distinct share each is to receive is presumed to be a gift to them as individuals, not as a class. For a class gift to be found in such a case, the testator's intent to create a right of survivorship must be clearly manifested in the language of the will.
Facts:
- Nelle G. Stewart executed a will on March 3, 1959.
- Clause Two of the will stated her belief that farm land she inherited from her husband should 'go back to my late husband’s side of the house.'
- The clause devised her one-fifth interest in the farm lands 'One-half (½) of my interest therein to Stewart Wilson, a nephew... and One-half (½) of my interest to Gene Burtle, a nephew...'
- Dr. Stewart, Nelle's late husband, had other living relatives of the same degree as Wilson and Burtle, but Nelle was only close to Wilson and Burtle.
- Gene Burtle died on May 15, 1963, after the will was executed but before Nelle Stewart's death.
- Nelle G. Stewart was aware of Gene Burtle's death but did not alter her will before she passed away on May 29, 1965.
- Clause Nine of the will, the residuary clause, devised the remainder of her property to two other individuals and expressly included a right of survivorship for them.
Procedural Posture:
- After Nelle G. Stewart's will was admitted to probate, Stewart Wilson filed a lawsuit in a trial court to construe the will.
- Wilson claimed Clause Two created a class gift, entitling him as the sole survivor to the entire devised interest in the farm.
- During the litigation, Wilson conveyed his interest to Gene Burtle's children, who were then substituted as plaintiffs.
- The defendants, the executrix and the residuary beneficiaries, argued the devise was to individuals and Burtle's share lapsed into the residuary estate.
- The trial court found for the defendants, holding that the gift to Gene Burtle lapsed and passed into the residue of the estate.
- The plaintiffs (Burtle's children) appealed the trial court's decree to the appellate court.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does a clause in a will devising a specific interest in property to two named individuals in equal shares create a class gift, thereby entitling the surviving individual to the entire interest if the other predeceases the testator?
Opinions:
Majority - Jones, J.
No. A clause in a will devising a specific interest in property to two named individuals in equal shares does not create a class gift. The court reasoned that a gift is to individuals, not a class, when the number of beneficiaries is certain and the share each is to receive is certain and not dependent upon the number of survivors. Here, the will specifically named Stewart Wilson and Gene Burtle and designated a 'One-half' interest to each, which strongly indicates a gift to them as individuals. The court found that the testatrix's stated desire for the land to 'go back to my late husband's side of the house' was fulfilled by the specific bequests to the two nephews and did not, by itself, imply an intent to create a survivorship right. Critically, the court noted that Clause Nine of the will did contain explicit survivorship language for the residuary beneficiaries, demonstrating that the testatrix knew how to create a class gift when she intended to. Its absence in Clause Two was therefore intentional. As a result, the devise to Gene Burtle lapsed upon his death and passed into the residuary estate.
Analysis:
This decision reinforces the strong legal presumption against finding a class gift when beneficiaries are named individually and given specific, fixed shares. It serves as a key example of the interpretive principle that a testator's demonstrated knowledge of specific legal language in one part of a will can be used to infer their intent in another part where that language is absent. The case underscores the importance for drafters to use explicit survivorship language if a class gift is intended for named beneficiaries. The ruling limits the power of extrinsic evidence to overcome the clear text of a will, especially when the will itself provides internal clues to the testator's intent.
Unlock the full brief for Dawson v. Yucus